ADV BOSMAN: Just for the record, your full names are Jakob Francois Kok?
JAKOB FRANCOIS KOK: (sworn states)
ADV BOSMAN: The applicant is duly sworn, Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Advocate Bosman. Mr van der Merwe.
EXAMINATION BY MR VAN DER MERWE: Thank you, Mr Chair.
Mr Kok, your application appears in the bundle in front of this Committee, from page 14 up and to page 25, can you confirm that?
MR J F KOK: Yes, I do confirm it.
MR VAN DER MERWE: And then you deal specifically with this action on page 20 of the document, 20 and 21, is that correct?
MR J F KOK: Yes.
MR VAN DER MERWE: You've already heard the evidence of Mr de Kock, as well as Mr du Toit, do you in general agree with their evidence?
MR J F KOK: Yes.
MR VAN DER MERWE: If we can then continue to highlight a few aspects. First of all, you confirm that you received your instruction from Mr du Toit, to assist in the preparation of this bomb.
MR J F KOK: That is correct, yes.
MR VAN DER MERWE: I think in order to ask more questions concerning this, could you just explain the detonating device that was used and how powerful it was.
MR J F KOK: If I can just begin, the request was that it was initially the request with the manuscript, or we moved away from the manuscript idea. We had to adapt it in order for it to work, because it was too thin for a mechanism to fit in. We then moved to a little book that was more-or-less the same size, but it had a harder cover in order to accommodate the mechanism. At the end of the day we would use sheet explosives. We used a detonator that had a spring in that will then lead to the ignition or detonation, but you need a book for that.
The power of the bomb was restricted to the size of the parcel that we had to prepare. You cannot go bigger than that, because Mr de Kock and WAL du Toit already explained what the restrictions are. But if you look, or if I had to work out what you can use, it was approximately 20 to 30 grams of explosives. The result of it would be - because it's Military explosives, there's a lot of heat and flames. There's not shrapnel involved, but the explosion and the heat will cause damage. With the testing of the device you do at the end of the day, get a flame of approximately half a metre.
MR VAN DER MERWE: Thank you. This detonating device, just for us who do not quite understand it, does that mean then that even if you open the parcel this device will not explode, you physically had to open the book or page through it and then it will detonate?
MR J F KOK: Yes, you had to open the book and then it had to be opened at least 40 millimetres wide, then it will be activated.
MR VAN DER MERWE: You are satisfied that this device that you built was safe, in terms of people handling this parcel without opening it?
MR J F KOK: Yes, we did everything we could to ensure this, but with the evidence that was led, it was a parcel that had to be prepared, the person would place it in the post box, it will not go through the normal postal system. It also was a consideration when we designed this device. It would not have gone off if the parcel was just lying there or somebody carried the parcel.
MR VAN DER MERWE: Then another aspect, the power of the bomb and the bystanders, you told us that it was approximately a flame of half a metre wide, that means that unless somebody looks over your shoulder, you would not expect that somebody who was standing close-by would be injured, if somebody opened this book?
MR J F KOK: It's very difficult to say, I cannot see that - the bystanders, they had to be very close to the parcel if they were injured. If they were in the area nothing would have really happened, there wouldn't have been serious injuries to them.
MR VAN DER MERWE: Then a last aspect that I'd like to deal with is that your recollection is that you tested this device at Vlakplaas, in the presence of Steve Bosch, is that correct?
MR J F KOK: Yes.
MR VAN DER MERWE: And as you mentioned on page 21 of your application, you also handed this device over to Sgt Bosch, in order for it to go to Mr de Kock for further dealings.
MR J F KOK: That is correct, we would have handed it over because we had to then explain how the detonating device worked. There was a wire that they had to pull out before they close the envelope and put it in the post box.
MR VAN DER MERWE: You also confirm that as far as your recollection is, you acted in an operation that was authorised by members of Head Office and according to instructions that you received from Mr du Toit, is that correct?
MR J F KOK: That is correct.
MR VAN DER MERWE: And at that stage you were also aware, as your application mentions, that this bomb would be sent to a person who was a member of the ANC's military wing in Swaziland.
MR J F KOK: Yes, that was conveyed to me.
MR VAN DER MERWE: You then in conclusion confirm that members of the Technical department were not involved in the addressing of this parcel, but only in the preparation of it.
MR J F KOK: That is correct, yes.
MR VAN DER MERWE: Thank you, Mr Chairperson.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR VAN DER MERWE
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Kok. I realise it's eleven, we'll adjourn for tea for fifteen minutes.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
ON RESUMPTION
JAKOB FRANCOIS KOK: (s.u.o.)
MR VAN DER MERWE: Mr Chairman, I indicated before we broke for tea, that I was finished, maybe there's one further aspect which I would just like for clarity's sake, just to take up with Mr Kok. With your permission.
CHAIRPERSON: Ja, certainly.
FURTHER EXAMINATION BY MR VAN DER MERWE: Thank you, Mr Chairman.
Mr Kok, if you were to compare this explosive device that you had manufactured to a limpet mine or a mini-limpet mine, what is the sort of comparison that you would be able to draw regarding the explosive power and the ability to control who the victim would be?
MR J F KOK: There isn't a comparison that can be drawn, with a limpet mine it functions according to a time mechanism which would be operated, one wouldn't know exactly when it would go off. There is a factor regarding temperature which would influence the detonation time. This a mechanism, with the parcel bomb it is a mechanism which is activated when the person opens the parcel. In terms of power it is difficult to draw a comparison, but a limpet mine would be much more powerful than the parcel-type bomb.
MR VAN DER MERWE: And the fact that a limpet mine would have a shrapnel affect which could also not be controlled, therefore persons in the vicinity would be exposed to serious injury and/or death.
MR J F KOK: Yes, there is a limited shrapnel affect with a limpet mine which could have an affect, but it would definitely injure or kill people in the vicinity were it to go off.
MR VAN DER MERWE: Thank you, Mr Chairman.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR VAN DER MERWE
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr van der Merwe. Mr Hugo?
MR HUGO: I have no questions, thank you Chairperson.
NO QUESTIONS BY MR HUGO
CHAIRPERSON: Ms Patel?
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS PATEL: Thank you, Honourable Chairperson.
Mr Kok, you stated that you didn't actually use the manuscript papers that were handed to you, in order to build the explosive, that you had actually used a different book because you needed a harder folio, what type of book did you use, can you recall?
MR J F KOK: Yes, it is a type of pocket book which one would use. I would say that it is about this size, it is a readily bound pocket book which we fitted in for the mechanism.
MS PATEL: So whoever opened the book, it wouldn't have been a book that is addressed to a specific person, it's a general, you can't say from the book that you had used that it would peak the curiosity specifically of the target that was intended? Meaning the MK, that it's a general book as opposed to a letter that is addressed to a specific person where you can see from the contents or the top of it, that this is meant for me.
MR J F KOK: Chairperson, if I understand correctly, if he sees the book, on top of the book there wouldn't be a person's name or address which was addressed to the person, but it is a general outer cover which doesn't have anything on it, so he would have to open the book in order to see the contents.
MS PATEL: Alright. Thank you, Honourable Chairperson.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS PATEL
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Advocate Bosman?
ADV BOSMAN: I have no questions, thank you Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Advocate Sandi?
ADV SANDI: Thank you, Chair, I don't have a question to ask, thank you.
CHAIRPERSON: Probably just one, Mr Kok. I think it's on page 21 if I'm not mistaken, or 20, where you said it had to be tested by the personnel of C1, do you recall that?
MR J F KOK: Yes, it would not only have been the personnel from C1 who would test it, Steve Bosch would have gone with me and together we would have tested the mechanism.
CHAIRPERSON: This testing - probably let me start here, that we have this manuscript which you say you converted into a pocket book, what would you test, the mechanism in that pocket book or something else?
MR J F KOK: We would test the mechanism and then the quantity of explosives to go with it, the quantity that could be placed in it and then the testing of the mechanism would be primarily to determine that the detonator which would be linked, because it is a composition that essentially builds itself we wanted to see whether the detonator would indeed detonate the explosives at the end of the day, because Military explosives are very stable and they have a necessity for a certain type or grade of detonator in order to activate the device.
CHAIRPERSON: Now this pocket book would be placed in an envelope, as we heard from Mr de Kock, how would the device be placed that when you open it should be activated? For instance, I would use something to open an envelope and you normally an envelope from where it's closed, but I don't say that is a rule in opening, Mr Hugo might use another method of opening, so where would this device be placed in that respect, that would activate?
MR J F KOK: The mechanism was placed inside the book, so the book would have to be entirely removed from the envelope and then opened before it would detonate. So one could have opened the envelope in any way, that would not have had any affect.
CHAIRPERSON: I notice that you acquired a diploma - if you could bare with me, page 15, you say in 1979 you began with after hours studies and you therefore qualified in 1983, and then required this Mechanical Engineering diploma, what does this course entail?
MR J F KOK: Chairperson, it is a regular Mechanical Engineering diploma which is presented by the Pretoria Technikon. It is a standard qualification which engineering students at the technikon would take a course for. There are various areas of study in which to specialise, such as Mechanical Design and Machine Technology, such as Machine Mechanics and Mathematics, so there are a variety of subjects to follow.
CHAIRPERSON: And then you have for this kind of covert operation probably acquired more knowledge or do some practicals in that, where would you do that?
MR J F KOK: The practical work was done at the Technical unit of the Police and then I also followed further courses in the Police, and as I've stated in my introduction, I followed courses in general with the Police, and then also at National Intelligence, which was external to the Police. I also followed pertinent explosive courses which we had to take.
CHAIRPERSON: This unit, if I may call it that, that is the Technical unit, how big was it, where you and probably, Mr du Toit were working from?
MR J F KOK: Chairperson, we were one section within the unit, we were the mechanical section within the unit. I cannot recall what the total was, but we worked on a Head Office basis on a national level, and then there were branches in the regions as well, with smaller units.
CHAIRPERSON: And after acquisition, or let me put it, before you would probably, like you studied from the Pretoria Technikon, were you to first engage yourself in Police Services before you undertake such studies?
MR J F KOK: I was a member of the Police, who obtained regular Police training before I began at the Technical unit and from that point onwards I followed my studies. It wasn't compulsory, it was a choice, to promote oneself further by means of further study.
CHAIRPERSON: If you were taken by the Police first and you wanted promotion and engaged yourself in studies, would you be, for instance, told that you would be transferred to some technical unit?
MR J F KOK: Chairperson, no, it didn't function that way at that stage, members of the Police requested to be placed with the Technical unit and then once again one's qualifications would be up to one's own choice. If one wanted to obtain further qualifications, further study was available.
CHAIRPERSON: Now after acquiring this, because you were an ...(indistinct) of the Police, when you were transferred into this Technical unit, were you told for instance, where your skills would be utilised?
MR J F KOK: Chairperson, no, we had a very broad background or field that we had to cover and one wasn't precisely informed what would be expected of one, but it developed in time as needs developed, so attention would also be paid to such needs.
CHAIRPERSON: We all know now that the struggle or the fight, or in the terminology of the Police, that terrorists were intensifying their fight against the Republic of South Africa, was this brought to your knowledge that your expertise would be required to combat this intense onslaught?
MR J F KOK: I cannot recall that it was pertinently stated that our expertise would be specifically required, but as I've stated, we developed a level of expertise which enabled us to design devices and to provide support in the field and as the onslaught worsened and we were more exposed, the need developed for us to work in it as such.
CHAIRPERSON: And when the various requests were made to you, did you reconcile yourself that you would now be working in combating this onslaught?
MR J F KOK: I associated myself with it entirely, with the fact that we were involved in a struggle and that by means of our contribution we could disrupt the struggle. So that the onslaught or the terrorist organisations involved in the onslaught would lose faith or confidence in their own abilities and their own equipment.
CHAIRPERSON: When you say that the terrorists would lose confidence in their own mechanisms, were you provided with mechanisms utilised by the terrorists?
MR J F KOK: Yes, in previous applications we have already dealt with the fact that we modified numerous items of their arms and ammunition that they used.
CHAIRPERSON: Would I be correct then to surmise that as time went on, you were now geared into combating this onslaught?
MR J F KOK: Yes, Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Kok. Mr van der Merwe, anything arising from what I asked?
MR VAN DER MERWE: No, thank you Mr Chairman, I have no further re-examination and I do not have any further evidence to present to the Committee.
NO RE-EXAMINATION BY MR VAN DER MERWE
CHAIRPERSON: I don't see anybody next to you, but I shouldn't be assuming things. Have you any evidence to present, Mr Patel?
MS PATEL: In this case your assumption would have been right, Honourable Chairperson, I do not have any evidence to be led, thank you.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Kok, you are excused.
WITNESS EXCUSED
CHAIRPERSON: Are the trains of our thought geared towards submissions?
MR HUGO: Yes, thank you, Mr Chairman.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Hugo.
MR HUGO IN ARGUMENT: Mr Chairman, first of all I just want to deal with the "co-operation agreement" between C1 and the Directorate of Covert Information. It's somewhat important, Mr Chairman, in that it shows that this particular government agency, I'm referring to "DKE", as Mr de Kock said, was also dealing with the struggle against the ANC and some other freedom organisations, it obviously is important that when Mr de Kock was approached with this particular request, that it wasn't done by some other government agency that wasn't dealing with the fight against the ANC and the PAC. And having taken cognisance of what Mr de Kock said as to what "DKE" was busying themselves with, he could have assumed that this particular request was aimed at resisting the struggle.
He, for instance, told you that they were responsible for information that led to the unfortunate injury to Mr Justice Albie Sachs, as an example as to what happened in the past and what must have had an influence on him when he decided to assist them. Mr Chairman, that is the question as to why he was prepared to assist Niewoudt.
He also obtained permission from Brig Schoon, which is also important to our minds, with due respect, and in our opinion. Coupled with that is the fact that Mr Niewoudt was the senior officer as well when he levelled this request at Mr de Kock. Brig Schoon obviously gave, as Mr de Kock has said, his permission that this particular operation be launched. And Mr de Kock in his own mind was convinced of it that he was acting within his implied authority and that he was, by partaking in this operation, resisting the struggle.
Mr Chairman, I think the vexed question, if I may call it that, in this particular instance is really whether there was certainty that this particular device was sent to a political opponent, and obviously the counter-weight is as to whether there was a callous disregard for the possibility that innocent bystanders could be killed.
Now Mr Chairman, you've heard that with explosives there's always a possibility that innocent bystanders can be killed and injured and maimed, but the question that this Committee has to decide upon, is really whether this was done on the basis that the possibility of injuries to innocent bystanders was limited and whether precautions were taken to try and avoid the unfortunate injury and damage to innocent bystanders. We submit Mr Chairman, that everything possible had been done to try and restrict that as far as it was humanly possible. One of the aspects obviously is that the device was manufactured in such a format that it was virtually impossible to put a very strong explosive in this manuscript. That in itself restricted the strength of the explosive device.
Another aspect that is to our mind, with all due respect, important, is the fact that the particular device was of such a nature that there was no danger of shrapnel fall-out, once again indicating that all precautionary measures had been taken to try and avoid injury to innocent bystanders.
Mr Chairman, and then obviously the Legislature had this particular problem in mind, when he was trying to compile the Act. And there's a very simple answer to, as far as we're concerned, in the Act when this particular question has to be decided upon, and in this regard Section, I think it's 20(3)(d) - I'll just read it to you if I may.
CHAIRPERSON: Please do.
MR HUGO: Where it says
"Whether a particular act is an act associated with a political objective, shall be decided with reference to the following criteria"
and then they obviously mention a number of criteria. And then (d) is with all due respect, the provision that we should look at, Mr Chairman. There it says:
"The object or the objective of the act, omission or offence, and in particular whether the act was primarily directed at a political opponent ..."
We say that it's very clear from this particular situation that this act was primarily aimed at the recipient or the would-be recipient of this particular parcel.
Mr Chairman, as to whether Mr de Kock had knowledge of the activities of the would-be recipient, he's told you what his knowledge was, how he obtained the knowledge and that he was convinced of it that he was a trained MK cadre. I have also taken cognisance of Advocate Bosman's question as to whether the writing of a manuscript of a biography was, in the normal course of events it gets done by somebody who was about to retire, we say even if that was so, he was a legitimate target, although Mr de Kock has testified that what he gleaned from the manuscript, that it was somewhat different in the sense that he got the impression that this particular person was still an active member of MK.
Mr Chairman, I'm not sure whether there are any other aspects that you want me to address you on, except that as far as the offences are concerned, ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: I think that's what I was worried about, what you have addressed me on. You hit the nail on the head.
MR HUGO: The offences, the first one is conspiracy to murder an unknown person, obviously attempted murder coupled or added to that, defeating the ends of justice, Mr Chairman, also offences in terms of the Explosives Act and then any other offences and delicts that have been committed and covered by the evidence and the facts of this matter. Those are really the submissions that we want to make in respect of this particular application, Mr Chairman. Thank you.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Hugo. Mr van der Merwe.
MR VAN DER MERWE IN ARGUMENT: Thank you, Mr Chair. I must also thank Mr Hugo, he's done most of my work.
I will concur with Mr Hugo's submissions regarding the political motive in this matter. I do not wish to add to that. I however will just refer specifically to the two applicants I represent.
It is my submission to this Committee that they acted on instructions as requested by Col de Kock at that stage, and were told that it was cleared with Brig Schoon. So clearly they acted in that manner. They had the necessary political motive and acted in full knowledge of the intended purpose of this parcel. There is no evidence of any malice or ill-will on the side of the applicants. They did not act for monetary gain.
I would also submit that full disclosure was made. There is the matter of Exhibit A, the letter which was forwarded by Mr Lamey on behalf of Mr Bosch. Mr Chairman, my submission simply is, I do not think it is necessary for this Committee to decide on this matter because of the fact that I think it is something on the side, it is possible that after so many years people could have forgotten, Mr Bosch could have forgotten that he was actually involved in this. However, as it might be, it is clear that the parcel went back to Vlakplaas and from there was redistributed to the personnel of Mr Niewoudt or Mr Niewoudt himself, who then acted with this parcel.
That basically is my address to this Committee. I would also concur that the crimes to be applied for would be conspiracy to murder and attempted murder, any crimes under the Explosives Act, possibly defeating the ends of justice and then all delicts also covered by the evidence before this Committee. Thank you, Mr Chairman.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr van der Merwe. Ms Patel?
MS PATEL: I have no address, thank you Honourable Chairperson.
NO ARGUMENT BY MS PATEL
CHAIRPERSON: Obviously no response?
MR VAN DER MERWE: Amazement, Mr Chairman.
CHAIRPERSON: This brings us to the end of the applications in the incident of the Manuscript Bomb. I must thank you all, legal representatives for your assistance herein, that not only your address would assist, but the manner in which even the evidence was led, it's of great assistance to us. Thank you very much. We reserve our decision as required by the Act, and we hope that there won't be an unduly long wait for us to deliver the same. We would endeavour to stick to the spirit of the Act and do that as soon as humanly possible and the parties will be advised accordingly. It would appear we have come to the end of our roll for this week.
MS PATEL: Yes, we have, Honourable Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: We had become accustomed to your face, Mr Hugo, I suppose one day won't make a big difference.
MR HUGO: Well Mr Chairman, you will no doubt be relieved to hear that I won't be here next week but Adv Hattingh will be dealing with this, so that should be a bit of a relief to you.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Hugo. This would conclude the hearings for this week. Our Interpreters, I know I have pushed you, it was not deliberate, I wanted to give you a day off tomorrow, hence I pushed and I've made it even simpler by giving you one-and-a-half, please take it with both hands. Everybody who showed interest in these hearings, we thank you, your appearances give us courage that we should go on with this work which we have undertaken for a long time and we are now scared to go back to our normal duties, but that's what life is all about. Thank you and have a nice weekend.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
